Conceptual Spiral

John R. Boyd

Edited by Chet Richards and Chuck Spinney

Produced and designed by Ginger Richards

For information on this edition, please see November 2011

the last page. www.dnipogo.org
 Focus

To make evident how science, engineering, and technology influence

our ability to interact and cope with an unfolding reality that we are a
part of, live in, and feed upon.

2
 For Openers

Let's reexamine our abstract

What do we find?

3
 Key Passage

...The theme that weaves its way through this Discourse on Winning and
Losing is not so much contained within each of the seven sections*, per
se, that make up the Discourse; rather, it is the kind of thinking that both
lies behind and makes up its very essence. For the interested, a careful
examination will reveal that the increasingly abstract discussion surfaces
a process of reaching across many perspectives, pulling each and every
one apart (analyses), all the while intuitively looking for those parts of
the disassembled perspectives which naturally interconnect with one
another to form a higher order, more general elaboration (synthesis) of
what is taking place. As a result, the process not only creates the
Discourse but it also represents the key to evolve the tactics, strategies,
goals, unifying themes, etc., that permit us to actively shape and adapt
to the unfolding world we are a part of, live in, and feed upon.

*Editors’s note: Including this presentation and The Essence of Winning

and Losing (1996)
4
 Why is This Passage Key?

Because it suggests a general way by which we can deal with the world
around us.

More specifically, we shall show that:

By exploiting the theme contained within this passage and by examining

the practice of science/engineering and the pursuit of technology, we
can evolve a conceptual spiral for comprehending, shaping, and
adapting to that world.

5
 Now

If the practice of science/engineering and the pursuit of technology are

going to be a key for unveiling this "conceptual spiral,“ we should ask
ourselves:

In speaking of science, engineering, and technology, what do we

mean?

6
 Simple-Minded Message

Science can be viewed as a self-correcting process of observation,

hypothesis, and test;
whereas
Engineering can be viewed as a self-correcting process of observation,
design and test;
while
Technology can be viewed as the wherewithal or state of the art
produced by the practice of science and engineering.

7
 Raises Question

What has the practice of science, engineering and the pursuit of

technology given us or done for us?

8
 Examples From Science

Some Outstanding Contributors Contributions

Isaac Newton (1687) "Exactness"/predictability via laws of

motion/gravitation
Adam Smith (1776) Foundation for modern capitalism
A.M. Ampere/C.P. Gauss Exactness/predictability via electric/
(1820's/1830's) magnetic laws
Carnot/Kelvin/Clausius/Boltzman Decay/disintegration via second law of
(1824/1852/1865/1870s) thermodynamics
Faraday/Maxwell/Hertz Union of electricity & magnetism via field
(1831/1865/1888) theory
Darwin & Wallace (1838/1858) Evolution via theory of natural selection
Marx & Engels (1848 - 1895) Basis for modern "scientific socialism"
Gregory Mendel (1866) Inherited traits via his laws of genetics
Henri Poincare (1890s) Inexactness/unpredictability via
gravitational influence of
three bodies

9
 Examples From Science
Some Outstanding Contributors Contributions
Max Planck (1900) Discreteness/discontinuity via his quantum theory
Albert Einstein (1905/1915) Exactness/predictability via his special & general
relativity theories
Bohr/de Broglie/Heisenberg/Schrödinger/ Uncertainty/indeterminism in quantum physics
Dirac/et al. (1913/1920s...)
L. Lowenheim & T. Skolem (1915 - 1933) Unconfinement (non-categoricalness) in
mathematics & logic
Gödel/Tarski/Church/Turing, et al. (1930s ...) Incompleteness/undecidability in mathematics &
logic
Claude Shannon (1948) Information theory as basis for communication
Crick & Watson (1953) DNA spiral helix as the genetically coded
information for life
Lorenz/Prigogine/Mandelbrot/ Irregularity/unpredictability in nonlinear dynamics
Feigenbaum/et al. (1963/1970s...)
G. Chaitin/C. Bennett (1965/1985) Incompleteness/incomprehensibility in information
theory

10
 Examples From Engineering
Some Outstanding Contributors Contributions
Savery/Newcomen/Watt (1698/1705/1769) Savery/Newcomen/Watt (1698/1705/1769)
George Stephenson (1825) Steam railway
H. Pixii/M.H. von Jacobi (1832/1838) AC generator/AC motor

Samuel Morse (1837) Telegraph

J.N. Niepce/J.M. Daguerre/Fox Talbot (1839) Photography

Gaston Plante (1859) Rechargeable battery

Z. Gramme/H. Fontaine (1869/1873) DC generator/DC motor

Nicholas Otto (1876) 4-cycle gasoline engine

Alexander G. Bell (1876) Telephone

Thomas A. Edison (1877) Phonograph

Thomas A. Edison (1879) Electric light bulb

Werner von Siemens (1879) Electric locomotive

Germany (1881) Electric metropolitan railway

11
 Examples From Engineering
Some Outstanding Contributors Contributions
Charles Parsons (1884) Steam turbine
Benz/Daimler (1885/1886) Gasoline automobile
T.A. Edison/J. LeRoy/T. Armat/et al. (1890-1896) Motion picture camera/projector

N. Tesla/G. Marconi (1893/1895) Wireless telegraph

Rudolf Diesel (1897) Diesel locomotive

Italy (1902) Electric railway

Wright Brothers (1903) Gasoline powered airplane

Christian Hulmeyer (1904) Radar

V. Paulsen/R.A. Fessenden (1904/1906) Wireless telephone

John A. Fleming/Lee De Forest (1904/1907) Vacuum tube

Tri Ergon/Lee De Forest (1919/1923) Sound motion picture

USA―Pittsburgh (1920) Public radio broadcasting

12
 Examples From Engineering
Some Outstanding Contributors Contributions
American Car Locomotive (1925) Diesel-electric locomotive
J.L. Baird (1926) Television
Warner Brothers (1927) Sound motion picture, “The Jazz Singer”

Germany/USA (1932/1934) Diesel-electric railway

Britain/USA/Germany (1935-1939) Operational radar

Germany/Britain/USA (1935/1936/1939) Television broadcasting

Hans von Ohain/Germany (1939/1939) Jet engine/jet airplane

Eckert & Mauchly (1946) Electronic computer

Bardcen & Brattain & Shockley (1947) Transistor

Ampex (1955) Video recorder

J. Kilby/R. Noyce (1958/1959) Integrated electronic circuit

T.H. Maiman (1960) Laser

12
 Examples From Engineering
Some Outstanding Contributors Contributions
Philips (1970) Video cassette recorder
Sony (1980) Video camcorder

12
 Raises Question

Looking at the past via the contributions these people have provided the
world:

What can we say about our efforts for now and for the future?

13
 Grand Message

In a mathematical/logical sense we can say:

Taken together, the theorems associated with Gödel, Lowenheim &

Skolem, Tarski, Church, Turing, Chaitin, and others reveal that not
only do the statements representing a theoretical system for
explaining some aspect of reality explain that reality inadequately or
incompletely but, like it or not, these statements spill out beyond any
one system and do so in unpredictable ways;

Or conversely,

These theorems reveal that we can neither predict the future

migration and evolution of these statements nor just confine them to
any one system nor suggest that they fully embrace any such system.

14
 Grand Message (Continued)

Now if we extend these ideas and build upon them in a scientific/

engineering sense, we can say:
• Any coherent intellectual or physical systems we evolve to
represent or deal with large portions of reality will at best
represent or deal with that reality incompletely or imperfectly.
• Moreover, we neither have nor can we create beforehand a
supersystem that can forecast or predict the kind of systems we
will evolve in the future to represent or deal with that reality more
completely or more perfectly.
• Furthermore, such a supersystem can neither forecast nor predict
the consequences that flow from those systems that we create
later on.
• Going even further, we cannot determine or discern the character
or nature of such systems (super or otherwise) within themselves.

14
 Grand Message (Continued)

Which altogether imply that:

People using theories or systems evolved from a variety of

information will find it increasingly difficult and ultimately impossible
to interact with and comprehend phenomena or systems that move
increasingly beyond and away from that variety—that is, they will
become more and more isolated from that which they are trying to
observe or deal with—unless they exploit the new variety to modify
their theories/systems or create new theories/systems.

14
 Raises Question

Taken together, what do the many contributions and Grand Message

suggest?

15
 Impression

While we can comprehend and predict some portions of the ever-

changing world that unfolds before us, other portions seem forever
indistinct and unpredictable.

16
 Raises Question

Very nice, but what does all this have to do with our ability to thrive and
grow in such a world that is seemingly orderly and predictable yet
disorderly and unpredictable?

17
 Comment

To get at this question let's take a closer and more general look at what
science, engineering, and the pursuit of technology produce and how
this is accomplished.
Furthermore, suspecting that these practices and pursuit are not wholly
accidental nor obvious and that they seem to change us in some ways,
let's also examine what keeps the whole enterprise going and how this
enterprise affects us personally.

18
 In other words,

In order to gain a richer image of science, engineering, and technology

we will address the following questions:

• What do science, engineering and technology produce?

• How is this accomplished?
• What is the driving mechanism that keeps the process alive and
ongoing; or put another way, what phenomena sustain or nourish
the whole enterprise?
• Finally, how does this enterprise of science, engineering, and
technology affect us personally as individuals, as groups, or as
societies?

19
 First of All

What do science, engineering, and technology produce?

If we examine the contributions from the practice of science and

engineering and generalize from these individual contributions, what do
we see? We see new ideas, new systems, new processes, new
materials, new etc.

In other words,

Science, engineering, and technology produce

change via novelty.

20
 How is This Novelty Produced?

To examine novelty, we speak of it in terms of those features that seem to be

part of that novelty. In other words, we reduce a novel pattern down to some
features that make up that pattern. Different people in examining such a pattern
may see differing features that make it up. In other words, there are different
ways by which a pattern can be reduced, hence the possibility for differing
features or parts. Regardless of how it comes out, we call this process of
reduction, analysis.
Pushing this process even further, we can reduce many different patterns
(analyses) to parts that make up each pattern and use these parts, or variations
thereof, to make a new pattern. This is done by finding some common features
that interconnect some or many of these parts so that a new pattern—whether it
be a new concept, new system, new process, new etc.—can be created. We call
this process of connection, synthesis.
Now if we test the results of this process with the world we're dealing with, we
have an analytical/synthetic feedback loop for comprehending, shaping, and
adapting to that world.

21
 Pulling all this together, we can say that:

Novelty is produced by a mental/physical feedback process of analyses

and synthesis that permits us to interact with the world so that we can
comprehend, cope with, and shape that world as well as be shaped by
it.

Which carries us to the question …

22
What is the driving mechanism that keeps the process
alive and ongoing; or put another way, what phenomena
sustain or nourish the whole enterprise?

One thing is clear: if our ideas and thoughts matched perfectly with what
goes on in the world, and if the systems or processes we designed
performed perfectly and matched with whatever we wanted them to do,
what would be the basis for evolving or creating new ideas, new
systems, new processes, new etc.? The answer: There wouldn't be any!

In other words,

The presence and production of mismatches are what sustain and

nourish the enterprise of science, engineering, and technology, hence
keep it alive and ongoing—otherwise there would be no basis for it to
continue.

23
 Very Nice, But …
How does this enterprise of science, engineering,
and technology affect us personally as individuals,
as groups, or as societies?

As already shown, the practice of science/engineering and the pursuit of

technology not only change the physical world we interact with—via new
systems, new processes, new etc.—but they also change the mental/
physical ways by which we think about and act upon that world.
In this sense, the practice of science/engineering and the pursuit of
technology permit us to continually rematch our mental/physical
orientation with that changing world so that we can continue to thrive
and grow in it.
Put simply, the enterprise of science, engineering, and technology
affects us personally as individuals, as groups, or as societies by
changing our orientations to match with a changing world that we, in
fact, help change.

24
 Now

If we reverse direction and reexamine where we have been, we can see

that without the intuitive interplay of analyses and synthesis, we have no
basic process for generating novelty, no basic process for addressing
mismatches between our mental images/impressions and the reality it is
supposed to represent, and no basic process for reshaping our
orientation toward that reality as it undergoes change.

Put simply,

Without the interplay of analyses and synthesis, we have no basis for

the practice of science/engineering and the pursuit of technology —
because novelty, mismatches, and reorientation as the life blood
ingredients that naturally arise out of such practice and pursuit can no
longer do so.

25
 Viewed in This Light

The preceding statements seem to suggest that the "Simple-Minded Message"

presented near the beginning whereby:

Science can be viewed as a self-correcting process of observation, hypothesis,

and test
whereas
Engineering can be viewed as a self-correcting process of observation, design,
and test

should be modified as follows:

Science can be viewed as a self-correcting process of observations, analyses/

synthesis, hypothesis, and test
whereas
Engineering can be viewed as a self-correcting process of observations,
analyses/synthesis, design, and test.
26
 Why?

Without the interplay of analyses and synthesis, one can evolve neither
the hypothesis or design and follow-on test, nor the original "Simple-
Minded Message," nor this presentation itself.

26
 Raises Question

What bearing does all this have on Winning and Losing?

27
 Illumination

Novelty is not only produced by the practice of science/engineering and

the pursuit of technology, it is also produced by the forces of nature, by
our own thinking and doing as well as by others. Furthermore, novelty is
produced continuously, if somewhat erratically or haphazardly. Now, in
order to thrive and grow in such a world, we must match our thinking
and doing, hence our orientation, with that emerging novelty. Yet, any
orientation constrained by experiences before that novelty emerges (as
well as by the Grand Message discussed earlier) introduces mismatches
that confuse or disorient us. However, the analytical/synthetic process,
previously described, permits us to address these mismatches so that
we can rematch thereby reorient our thinking and action with that
novelty. Over and over, this continuing whirl of reorientation,
mismatches, analyses/synthesis enables us to comprehend, cope with,
and shape as well as be shaped by the novelty that literally flows around
and over us.

28
 Maybe So

Yet, upon reflection, we still have a puzzle: Why does our world continue
to unfold in an irregular, disorderly, unpredictable manner, even though
some of our best minds try to represent it as being more regular, orderly,
and predictable?

29
 More Pointedly

With so much effort over such a long period by so many people to

comprehend, shape, and adapt to a world that we depend upon for
vitality and growth, why does such a world, although richer and more
robust, continue to remain uncertain, ever-changing, and unpredictable?

30
 Response

Very simply, review of "Destruction and Creation," this presentation, and

our own experiences reveal that the various theories, systems,
processes, etc. that we employ to make sense of that world contain
features that generate mismatches that, in turn, keep such a world
uncertain, ever-changing, and unpredictable.

31
 These Features Include

• Uncertainty associated with the unconfinement, undecidability, and

incompleteness theorems of mathematics and logic;
• Numerical imprecision associated with using the rational and
irrational numbers in the calculation and measurement processes;
• Quantum uncertainty associated with Planck's Constant and
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle;
• Entropy increase associated with the Second Law of
Thermodynamics;
• Irregular or erratic behavior associated with far-from-equilibrium,
open, nonlinear processes or systems with feedback;
• Incomprehensibility associated with the inability to completely
screen, filter, or otherwise consider spaghetti-like influences from a
plethora of ever-changing, erratic, or unknown outside events;

32
 These Features Include (Cont.)

• Mutations associated with environmental pressure, replication errors,

or unknown influences in molecular and evolutionary biology;
• Ambiguity associated with natural languages as they are used and
interact with one another; and
• Novelty generated by the thinking and actions of unique individuals
and their many-sided interactions with each other.

32
 Underlying Message

There is no way out, unless we can eliminate the features just cited.
Since we don't know how to do this, we must continue the whirl of
reorientation, mismatches, analyses/synthesis over and over again ad
infinitum as a basis to comprehend, shape, and adapt to an unfolding,
evolving reality that remains uncertain, ever-changing, unpredictable.

33
 Now

If we connect this continuing whirl of reorientation, mismatches,

analyses/synthesis and the novelty that arises out of it with the previous
discussion we can see that we have:

A conceptual spiral for

Exploration Discovery Innovation

Thinking Doing Achieving
Learning Unlearning Relearning
Comprehending Shaping Adapting

Hence, a conceptual spiral for generating

Insight Imagination Initiative

34
 Which Raises the Question

Can we survive and grow without these abilities?

35
No!

36
 Which Suggests

The conceptual spiral also represents:

A Paradigm for
Survival and Growth

37
 Point

Since survival and growth are directly connected with the uncertain,
ever-changing, unpredictable world of winning and losing, we will exploit
this whirling (conceptual) spiral of orientation, mismatches, analyses/
synthesis, reorientation, mismatches, analyses/synthesis … so that we
can comprehend, cope with, and shape—as well as be shaped by—that
world and the novelty that arises out or it.

38
 About this edition
This edition of Conceptual Spiral is an Apple Keynote rendering of the typewritten version dated
“July/August 1992.” It was created by converting a PDF of the original with Acrobat’s OCR function
and then transferring the text to PowerPoint then to Keynote. That version was edited for accuracy
and some of the typographical flourishes Boyd used for his oral briefings were toned down for
readability. It was his last major briefing and the only one not focused on human conflict. Perhaps for
that reason, it is the least familiar to most students of Boyd’s work. John, however, intended for his
concepts to apply to more than warfare or even conflict. As he opens the Abstract to his collection, A
Discourse on Winning and Losing: “To flourish and grow in a many-sided. uncertain and
everchanging world that surrounds us, suggests that we have to make intuitive within ourselves those
many practices we need to meet the exigencies of that world.” In Conceptual Spiral, Boyd zeroes in
on how we create those “many practices.” Page numbers correspond to the original.
About the Editors
Chuck Spinney was a colleague of Boyd’s both in the Air Force and in the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, where he participated in every edition of the Discourse. Chuck is the author of Defense
Facts of Life and numerous monographs and op-eds. His commentaries on defense issues appear
from time to time at http://chuckspinney.blogspot.com and are archived at http://www.dnipogo.org.
Chet Richards worked with Boyd on his first paper, “Destruction and Creation,” on various editions of
Patterns of Conflict, Conceptual Spiral, “The Essence of Winning and Losing,” and near the end of
Boyd’s life, on business applications. He is a retired colonel in the Air Force, and wrote a book,
Certain to Win (2004), that applies Boyd’s concepts to business.
Ginger Richards is co-owner and president of Kettle Creek Corporation and created the layouts for
the PowerPoint versions of all Boyd’s briefings.

Bluffton, South Carolina USA

November 2011